Current equivalent to a Taurus car?

Bongleur · Post by **Bongleur** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:27 am

I probably should replace my Sable in a few years, and I need to start paying attention to models now so I can ease myself into it. I'd buy another Taurus/Sable if they were still around. I like the size, wheelbase, and 160 HP. And split bench electric seats. Also getting some extras so its a factory car vs off the lot -- large gas tank,heavy duty electric, oil cooler, engine block heater.

The A Pillar is rusting out right where it meets the others. And it doesn't have side air bags.

Mudpuppy · Post by **Mudpuppy** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:36 am

Ford is still making the Taurus. Granted, it's redesigned from what you have, but that's to be expected after several years have passed. They just announced the 2013 model at the Chicago Auto Show: http://www.ford.com/cars/taurus/

etarini · Post by **etarini** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:12 am

I had a 1998 Taurus Wagon and now I have a 2003 Taurus Wagon. I love it, and I'm already beginning to mourn its future demise. [Warning: melancholy rant coming!]

It's running okay, and it only has 100,000 miles on it, but I've searched through Consumer Reports and I can't find its replacement.

I want seating for 6 (mine has the jump seats in the rear) and the ability to fit a 6-foot bookcase or 8-foot 2x4s INSIDE the vehicle. I love its low, ground-hugging height (57"). People like to "sit up high", but I find no value whatsoever in the SUV design. Unfortunately, Detroit's engineers all seem to have failed freshman physics: I DON'T want a car where they've raised the center of gravity so that it rolls over more easily during collision avoidance, and I don't want something where they've uselessly increased the weight, which only increases the need for horsepower and reduces the MPG. And I don't want or need 4-wheel drive; it doesn't matter how many drive wheels you have, if you don't have traction.

It's interesting, in a pathetic sort of way, to see how the Subaru wagon morphed into a completely traditional SUV. It doesn't look like its original self - it's been put on on steroids and an American Diet. I've wondered if Americans, because of their increased obesity and immobility, need to have more room "for comfort" and demand these huge vehicles. Or is it because people can't bend over easily to get into a Taurus sedan without bumping their heads anymore?

The closest thing I can find is the Mazda5, but it's 7 inches taller - presumably, like all SUVs and minivans, to make it necessary to bring a stepstool with you to Home Depot so you can wrestle a 4x8 sheet of plywood onto your roof and tie it down; that's easy to do on my Taurus wagon - you can do it standing up.

Sorry for the rant. Sniff, sniff...I'm gonna miss my Taurus wagon.

Eric

HardKnocker · Post by **HardKnocker** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:15 am

Have had two Taurus wagons, a 1995 that had 200k on it and still have a 2002 that is in excellent condition with 102k miles. I love wagons for their versatility.

Just bought a 2012 Subaru Outback. Made in Tennessee. I'm impressed with it. Check them out. Very much like a station wagon.

jasonlitka · Post by **jasonlitka** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 10:54 am

The new Taurus is a lot larger than the old one. Have you looked at the Fusion?

bottlecap · Post by **bottlecap** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 11:03 am

If you like the old Taurus, I think the new Taurus and the Fusion are worth a look.

JT

dailybagel · Post by **dailybagel** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 11:16 am

I rented a Ford Fusion and was impressed. Quiet and smooth.

It's the mid-size car, while the current Taurus is a full-size sedan. As others have said, try test driving both and seeing which fits better.

The Dark Knight · Post by **The Dark Knight** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 11:23 am

If you enjoy the typical American-car "floaty" relaxed ride, you might be in for a surprise if you test drive the Fusion. The Fusion is actually considered one of the more "athletic" fun to drive family cars now. Not a surprise as the current model is derived from the Mazda6 platform.

I think Toyota is the "spiritual successor" to those old family cars of yesteryear- the Tauruses, LeSabres, Sables, etc. I would say a Toyota Camry will probably come the closest to the older Taurus of any new car you can find on the market these days in terms of ride comfort. Plus I think the Camry is near the top in terms of American-sourced content in the car ( I believe they assemble in Kentucky), if that matters to you.

Ironically, the American domestic brands - Ford, Chevy, Chrysler - are actually coming out with more "fun to drive" family sedans, while it seems like Toyota and Honda are now the more conservative brands.

norookie · Post by **norookie** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 11:35 am

bungalow10 · Post by **bungalow10** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 12:04 pm

If you don't like the Ford offerings, the Camry, Accord, or Impala might suit you.

deanbrew · Post by **deanbrew** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 12:15 pm

Bongleur, You should certainly look at the Taurus and Fusion. Also, the Toyota Camry and Hyundai Sonata and other mid-size and full-size sedans. I can think of well over a dozen cars in those classes. I owned a couple of Tauruses (Tauri?) in the 80s and 90s and think modern cars are improved in almost every way.

etarini, Unfortunately, there are not many station wagons currently for sale. As you note, most modern "crossovers" are nothing more than raised station wagons. Like you, I don't understand the appeal of the higher height and added weight. My wife has a Toyota Venza, which is a raised wagon crossover. I don't like it much at all. Far too heavy and big with no real improvement in interior space. Obviously, however, the manufacturers responded to the market. It's a shame there are no more Taurus, Camry, Accord or many other mainstream wagons.

The Subaru Outback is undeniably raised from the Legacy upon which it's based, but it is more wagon than crossover or SUV. It's 2" higher than the Mazda5.

In addition to the Mazda 5 and Outback, you can look at the VW Jetta wagon and the Honda Crosstour. Of those, only the Jetta is a "low" wagon, and it's smaller than you desire.

mmmodem · Post by **mmmodem** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 12:16 pm

etarini wrote:Unfortunately, Detroit's engineers all seem to have failed freshman physics: I DON'T want a car where they've raised the center of gravity so that it rolls over more easily during collision avoidance, and I don't want something where they've uselessly increased the weight, which only increases the need for horsepower and reduces the MPG. And I don't want or need 4-wheel drive; it doesn't matter how many drive wheels you have, if you don't have traction.

The engineers didn't fail freshman physics. They shook their heads in dismay as the bean counters told them the American public isn't buying their wagons. They'd rather buy gas guzzling barges instead. Can't blame Detroit engineers for lack of wagons. Even the Japanese can't figure out how to bring it back.

Anyway, the Taurus is still around and they are in the full size class with the Toyota Avalon, Nissan Maxima, Hyundai Azera, and Chevy Impala. But you will find that everything has gotten bigger so that midsize vehicles like Camry, Accord, Fusion, etc will match your current Taurus in size and with more power coming from a 4 cylinder engine. Don't think anything in the midsize class right now has anything less than 170 horsepower. I think the only sedan left that have front bench seats is the Impala.

Bongleur · Post by **Bongleur** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 12:18 pm

dailybagel wrote:I rented a Ford Fusion and was impressed. It's the mid-size car, while the current Taurus is a full-size sedan.

Say what? My 1994 Sable is a MID sized car. Are cars still shrinking?

A full size car is a Crown Vic or a Caprice. If I wanted full size that's what I'd get (w/ police or taxi package).

interplanetjanet · Post by **interplanetjanet** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 12:32 pm

deanbrew wrote:etarini, Unfortunately, there are not many station wagons currently for sale. As you note, most modern "crossovers" are nothing more than raised station wagons. Like you, I don't understand the appeal of the higher height and added weight. My wife has a Toyota Venza, which is a raised wagon crossover. I don't like it much at all. Far too heavy and big with no real improvement in interior space. Obviously, however, the manufacturers responded to the market. It's a shame there are no more Taurus, Camry, Accord or many other mainstream wagons.

I was about to say "what about Volvo?" but paused for a moment while I checked, and found to my dismay that 2011 was the last year for the Volvo V70 in the USA. We won't be getting the Passat wagon for 2012 either.

It's strange to see a useful vehicle form-factor just...disappear. They're a disappearing breed like convertibles with five seatbelts - you have to go back to the '90s to find one (the cheapest new one being made is a Bentley, believe it or not).

-janet

Epsilon Delta · Post by **Epsilon Delta** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 12:37 pm

Bongleur wrote:
dailybagel wrote:I rented a Ford Fusion and was impressed. It's the mid-size car, while the current Taurus is a full-size sedan.
Say what? My 1994 Sable is a MID sized car. Are cars still shrinking?

A full size car is a Crown Vic or a Caprice. If I wanted full size that's what I'd get (w/ police or taxi package).

Quite the reverse.

The 2011 Taurus is 10inches longer, 5 inches wider, 5 inches higher and 900lb heavier than your 1994 model.
The 2011 Taurus is almost as large as the 1994 Crown Vic and actually a few pounds heavier. That's why the 1994 Taurus was mid-sized and the 2011 Taurus is full sized.

Anybody still classify the Civic as a sub-compact?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Tauru ... eration%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Tauru ... eration%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Crown_Victoria

TimDex · Post by **TimDex** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 1:01 pm

My wife has a 2005 taurus and really likes its dependability. My understanding is that the present taurus is simply a rebranded larger ford. They simply didn't want to abandon the taurus name. tim

rustymutt · Post by **rustymutt** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 1:05 pm

I drive a 2007 Mercury Montego, which is like the Ford Five Hundred. I love it. The Ford Five Hundred, has changed to the Ford Taurus, which I also love. Test drive one, you'll like the way it drives. I'm a big guy at 6'5", 250lbs and it's the room in my 07 Mercury that I particularly love. I also drove a Ford Fusion, and was impressed. Not quit the room for me. Just got back from a 1150 mile road trip, and got an average gas mileage of 25.2 mpg.

Valuethinker · Post by **Valuethinker** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 1:37 pm

interplanetjanet wrote:
deanbrew wrote:etarini, Unfortunately, there are not many station wagons currently for sale. As you note, most modern "crossovers" are nothing more than raised station wagons. Like you, I don't understand the appeal of the higher height and added weight. My wife has a Toyota Venza, which is a raised wagon crossover. I don't like it much at all. Far too heavy and big with no real improvement in interior space. Obviously, however, the manufacturers responded to the market. It's a shame there are no more Taurus, Camry, Accord or many other mainstream wagons.
I was about to say "what about Volvo?" but paused for a moment while I checked, and found to my dismay that 2011 was the last year for the Volvo V70 in the USA. We won't be getting the Passat wagon for 2012 either.

It's strange to see a useful vehicle form-factor just...disappear. They're a disappearing breed like convertibles with five seatbelts - you have to go back to the '90s to find one (the cheapest new one being made is a Bentley, believe it or not).

-janet

Welcome to capitalism/ market economies. They produce an average product for an average consumer, not the full range.

They don't produce *everything* consumers want, just what *enough* consumers want at that price. I could rhyme off to you things I'd love to be able to buy, services I would pay to have done, that no longer exist.

You could pay someone to build you a station wagon OR you could (perhaps) import one from Europe, personally, but it's doubtful you could afford the cost of either move.

A relative, 6'5" went through same thing with Volvo BTW, and wound up replacing his 11 year old one with a BMW X3 SUV. Hard to find a car tall enough for a tall family.

Valuethinker · Post by **Valuethinker** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 1:38 pm

Bongleur wrote:I probably should replace my Sable in a few years, and I need to start paying attention to models now so I can ease myself into it. I'd buy another Taurus/Sable if they were still around. I like the size, wheelbase, and 160 HP. And split bench electric seats. Also getting some extras so its a factory car vs off the lot -- large gas tank,heavy duty electric, oil cooler, engine block heater.

The A Pillar is rusting out right where it meets the others. And it doesn't have side air bags.

I think the Ford Fusion is the successor in terms of size?

One would think the right Hyundai model in the right size bracket is similar basic transportation.

Tony · Post by **Tony** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 1:45 pm

Still driving a 1992 Taurus. We call it The Drunken Whale.

FrugalInvestor · Post by **FrugalInvestor** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 1:46 pm

interplanetjanet wrote:
deanbrew wrote:etarini, Unfortunately, there are not many station wagons currently for sale. As you note, most modern "crossovers" are nothing more than raised station wagons. Like you, I don't understand the appeal of the higher height and added weight. My wife has a Toyota Venza, which is a raised wagon crossover. I don't like it much at all. Far too heavy and big with no real improvement in interior space. Obviously, however, the manufacturers responded to the market. It's a shame there are no more Taurus, Camry, Accord or many other mainstream wagons.
I was about to say "what about Volvo?" but paused for a moment while I checked, and found to my dismay that 2011 was the last year for the Volvo V70 in the USA. We won't be getting the Passat wagon for 2012 either.

It's strange to see a useful vehicle form-factor just...disappear. They're a disappearing breed like convertibles with five seatbelts - you have to go back to the '90s to find one (the cheapest new one being made is a Bentley, believe it or not).

-janet

The Acura TSX Sportwagon has been available in the U.S. since the 2011 model year. It is essentially the same car sold as the Honda Accord Tourer in Europe and costs a tad bit less than a Bentley.

interplanetjanet · Post by **interplanetjanet** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:06 pm

FrugalInvestor wrote:
interplanetjanet wrote:It's strange to see a useful vehicle form-factor just...disappear. They're a disappearing breed like convertibles with five seatbelts - you have to go back to the '90s to find one (the cheapest new one being made is a Bentley, believe it or not).
The Acura TSX Sportwagon has been available in the U.S. since the 2011 model year. It is essentially the same car sold as the Honda Accord Tourer in Europe and costs a tad bit less than a Bentley.

Yes. I was referring to the five seatbelt convertible issue when I brought up Bentley. There are many 5-belt coupes that convertible models are twinned with or based on, but all the convertibles choose to drop the middle seatbelt. I think it's some kind of conspiracy. :p

-janet

thirdman · Post by **thirdman** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:15 pm

The Ford Taurus came out in 1986. Donald Petersen asked Jack Telnack to design a new mid sized car. He came back with a conventional design. Petersen asked Telnack if that is what he would like to park in his driveway. Telnack then came back with what he and his team liked. Petersen green lighted the project which at that time cost 3 billion dollars. If it had failed, Ford may have failed. It was a totally new vehicle, with new power trains. Fortunately it became a huge success.

Toyota copied the Taurus with their Camry, even to the exact A pillar pickup points. Ford had created a new segment. Unfortunately they lost the leadership in this segment with subsequent redesigns of the Taurus. The current entries in the segment are the Camry, Altima, and others like them. The Ford Five Hundred, a great design by J. Mays and a bigger car than the Camry, morphed into the new Taurus with poor visibility. The Fusion I think is going to be replaced. It is an old modified Mazda design. I would probably buy the Altima 4 cylinder in this size class.

I think you have to ask yourself what you need in a car, including size, drive wheels, etc. If I was going to buy an internal combustion engine vehicle now, I would buy a Mazda 3 hatchback, a Prius or a VW GTI. But my next car will be a Leaf produced in the US.

Eagle784 · Post by **Eagle784** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:35 pm

An E-Class Wagon should be at least as large and is only an inch taller than the Taurus.

Sunny Sarkar · Post by **Sunny Sarkar** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:49 pm

I was amazed by how much Toyota put into even the Camry's LX trim level for their new 2012 model. It looks and feels positively upscale. The EX & EX-L trims must then be awesome.

Auream · Post by **Auream** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:59 pm

thirdman wrote:The Ford Five Hundred, a great design by J. Mays and a bigger car than the Camry, morphed into the new Taurus with poor visibility. The Fusion I think is going to be replaced. It is an old modified Mazda design. I would probably buy the Altima 4 cylinder in this size class.

The new 2013 Fusion looks pretty good, IMHO. Will be available in several versions including a plug-in hybrid, but even the base model gets more HP and better fuel economy than the outgoing model.

http://www.ford.com/cars/fusion/2013/

chaz · Post by **chaz** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 3:10 pm

I like Camry.

thirdman · Post by **thirdman** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 3:13 pm

The 2013 Fusion will come out this fall. The front design is reminiscent of an Aston Martin. Ford stumbled with their automated manual transmission in the Focus. I would probably wait on the new Fusion, and not buy it when it debuts. But that is just me. I currently drive a 2003 Camry, so you can see I buy basic reliable transportation that I keep a long time.

awval999 · Post by **awval999** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 3:15 pm

Yeah, the answer is the sexy new 2013 Fusion.

tomd37 · Post by **tomd37** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 3:39 pm

I know the feeling about the Ford Taurus and its twin the Mercury Sable. My wife had a 1993 Mercury Sable that was totaled in 2001 when somebody pulled out in front of us crossing two lanes of oncoming traffic. It has been 11 years now since that car was replaced with a 2001 Lexus ES300, but I dare say there is not a month that goes by in which she fails to say how much she misses that car.

I'd say the Ford Fusion is the most like the Taurus.

tibbitts · Post by **tibbitts** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:52 pm

Bongleur wrote:I probably should replace my Sable in a few years, and I need to start paying attention to models now so I can ease myself into it. I'd buy another Taurus/Sable if they were still around. I like the size, wheelbase, and 160 HP. And split bench electric seats. Also getting some extras so its a factory car vs off the lot -- large gas tank,heavy duty electric, oil cooler, engine block heater.

The A Pillar is rusting out right where it meets the others. And it doesn't have side air bags.

Getting back to the original post, I think it's a bit out-of-touch with regard to options that, while not that uncommon in the '60s and '70s (and to a lesser extent in the 80s and 90s), are extremely rare in modern times. I had the optional 18gal tank in my Taurus and appreciated it, but seriously, there were never many cars with optional gas tank sizes (trucks, more so.) And the heavy-duty options that were commonly available once are pretty much non-existent now, or are now reserved for fleet orders only. I too miss the wagon, and there isn't really a comparable new model, but realities are what they are.

Paul

FrugalInvestor · Post by **FrugalInvestor** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 6:21 pm

interplanetjanet wrote:
FrugalInvestor wrote:
interplanetjanet wrote:It's strange to see a useful vehicle form-factor just...disappear. They're a disappearing breed like convertibles with five seatbelts - you have to go back to the '90s to find one (the cheapest new one being made is a Bentley, believe it or not).
The Acura TSX Sportwagon has been available in the U.S. since the 2011 model year. It is essentially the same car sold as the Honda Accord Tourer in Europe and costs a tad bit less than a Bentley.
Yes. I was referring to the five seatbelt convertible issue when I brought up Bentley. There are many 5-belt coupes that convertible models are twinned with or based on, but all the convertibles choose to drop the middle seatbelt. I think it's some kind of conspiracy. :p

-janet

Sorry, thought you were referring to this....

http://www.motortrend.com/future/concep ... irst_look/

Bongleur · Post by **Bongleur** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 6:35 pm

re fleet orders --- yea, I spent a little time trying to figure out how to get a police or taxi package. I'm sure any dealer wants your money, but I'd like to go in knowing how not to get totally ripped off for it. There must be some dealer who caters to people who want those packages and who buys the minimum quantity to re-sell individually to local dealers. Or something.

tibbitts · Post by **tibbitts** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:03 pm

Bongleur wrote:re fleet orders --- yea, I spent a little time trying to figure out how to get a police or taxi package. I'm sure any dealer wants your money, but I'd like to go in knowing how not to get totally ripped off for it. There must be some dealer who caters to people who want those packages and who buys the minimum quantity to re-sell individually to local dealers. Or something.

It would be interesting if you could report on your experiences search for fleet vehicle availability.

However I think you'll find the range of products much less than it was previously. For example in the '70s and '80s, you had manufacturers offering what were then small, medium, and large vehicles, all with readily available (to an appropriate customer) fleet-oriented options. Today you are more likely to find one car and one SUV. And as I said before, most of the heavy-duty options for "retail" cars are gone. However, overall cars are much higher quality, and incorporate components that would have probably qualified as heavy-duty in the old days.

Paul

interplanetjanet · Post by **interplanetjanet** » Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:04 pm

FrugalInvestor wrote:
interplanetjanet wrote:It's strange to see a useful vehicle form-factor just...disappear. They're a disappearing breed like convertibles with five seatbelts - you have to go back to the '90s to find one (the cheapest new one being made is a Bentley, believe it or not).
The Acura TSX Sportwagon has been available in the U.S. since the 2011 model year. It is essentially the same car sold as the Honda Accord Tourer in Europe and costs a tad bit less than a Bentley.

Interesting. A shame there's no third-row seating option.

FrugalInvestor wrote:Sorry, thought you were referring to this....

http://www.motortrend.com/future/concep ... irst_look/

I hope nobody takes offense, but looking at that is almost proof to me that money can't buy you taste.

-janet

NHRATA01 · Post by **NHRATA01** » Fri Mar 16, 2012 1:53 pm

If you really like the Taurus, the closest modern thing you will probably find is the Impala, with respect to a column shifter and front bench, as well as ample rear legroom and trunk. I'm not sure what you're looking for from a new car - basic boglehead-ian transportation, or something maybe more invigorating, as the Impala is to be fair a dated design at this point (car has been around, little changed since '05). That doesn't mean obsolete: for 2012 it added a 6-speed automatic with a 3.6 direct-injection 300hp V6 and achieves about 30mpg. The other benefit is they are being heavily discounted by dealers ($6K or even more) so you can get a hell of a deal (low $20s) on a large car. The negative is it will be lagging in amenities compared to something like a Fusion, Accord, Sonata, new Camry, or new Malibu, and in my opinion has a very stale exterior design as well as spartan interior.

RobertAlanK · Post by **RobertAlanK** » Fri Mar 16, 2012 2:03 pm

Consulting my chart, I believe the natural progression from the Taurus would be the Ford Gemini but I can't find it in their inventory anywhere.

Post by **Alex Frakt** » Fri Mar 16, 2012 2:17 pm

Impala is literally the only 2012 car with a front bench seat option. And it almost certainly be gone when the all-new 2013 model debuts shortly. How do you feel about a lightly used Cadillac DTS? They had this as an option until the 2011 model.

Fear and Loathing · Post by **Fear and Loathing** » Sat Mar 24, 2012 9:26 pm

During a recent trip I rented a Dodge Charger. It has the 6 cylinder engine. It drove very nicely and was comfortable for the 400 mile trip. I drove from Philly to Cleveland - 408 miles one way. I averaged 33 miles to the gallon. This was at highway speeds - I set the cruise control at 74 mph for the entire trip. This was indicated on the fuel monitor. Not believing it I verified the gas mileage during fill-up. I got 33.2 mpg. Not a bad car and comfortable. It certainly had a lot of pickup and if I mashed my foot down would VERY quickly accelerate .

hazlitt777 · Post by **hazlitt777** » Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:05 pm

The Fusion is the modern Ford equivalent to the old Taurus. My parents have one, I've driven it, and I like it very much.

Dave76 · Post by **Dave76** » Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:47 pm

tibbitts wrote:
Bongleur wrote:re fleet orders --- yea, I spent a little time trying to figure out how to get a police or taxi package. I'm sure any dealer wants your money, but I'd like to go in knowing how not to get totally ripped off for it. There must be some dealer who caters to people who want those packages and who buys the minimum quantity to re-sell individually to local dealers. Or something.
It would be interesting if you could report on your experiences search for fleet vehicle availability.

However I think you'll find the range of products much less than it was previously. For example in the '70s and '80s, you had manufacturers offering what were then small, medium, and large vehicles, all with readily available (to an appropriate customer) fleet-oriented options. Today you are more likely to find one car and one SUV. And as I said before, most of the heavy-duty options for "retail" cars are gone. However, overall cars are much higher quality, and incorporate components that would have probably qualified as heavy-duty in the old days.

Paul

I'm not impressed with the quality of today's cars. I have two cars -- a 2012 Hyundai and a 1987 Chrysler New Yorker (link below). The Chrysler has a soft-touch dashboard and real carpeting, unlike the Hyundai. Also, the Hyundai doesn't have real cloth seats. This car's upholstery has a strange synthetic mesh material. I really don't know what to call it. Ford uses the same kind of material in the Focus.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIbv7bku15E

Valuethinker · Post by **Valuethinker** » Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:23 am

Dave76 wrote: I'm not impressed with the quality of today's cars. I have two cars -- a 2012 Hyundai and a 1987 Chrysler New Yorker (link below). The Chrysler has a soft-touch dashboard and real carpeting, unlike the Hyundai. Also, the Hyundai doesn't have real cloth seats. This car's upholstery has a strange synthetic mesh material. I really don't know what to call it. Ford uses the same kind of material in the Focus.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIbv7bku15E

Apples and Oranges?

In that a Chrysler New Yorker was always a 'posh' car, and a Hyundai is basic transportation?

What's the Chrysler equivalent now? Cadillac? Lincoln Town Car? Mercedes?

Dave76 · Post by **Dave76** » Sun Mar 25, 2012 7:32 am

Valuethinker wrote:
Dave76 wrote: I'm not impressed with the quality of today's cars. I have two cars -- a 2012 Hyundai and a 1987 Chrysler New Yorker (link below). The Chrysler has a soft-touch dashboard and real carpeting, unlike the Hyundai. Also, the Hyundai doesn't have real cloth seats. This car's upholstery has a strange synthetic mesh material. I really don't know what to call it. Ford uses the same kind of material in the Focus.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIbv7bku15E
Apples and Oranges?

In that a Chrysler New Yorker was always a 'posh' car, and a Hyundai is basic transportation?

What's the Chrysler equivalent now? Cadillac? Lincoln Town Car? Mercedes?

The dash in the Dodge Aries K and Plymouth Reliant K twins is the same dash. They share many parts.

deanbrew · Post by **deanbrew** » Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:07 am

Dave76 wrote:
Valuethinker wrote:
Dave76 wrote: I'm not impressed with the quality of today's cars. I have two cars -- a 2012 Hyundai and a 1987 Chrysler New Yorker (link below). The Chrysler has a soft-touch dashboard and real carpeting, unlike the Hyundai. Also, the Hyundai doesn't have real cloth seats. This car's upholstery has a strange synthetic mesh material. I really don't know what to call it. Ford uses the same kind of material in the Focus.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIbv7bku15E

The dash in the Dodge Aries K and Plymouth Reliant K twins is the same dash. They share many parts.

Wow, just as beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so, apparently is perception of quality. There is no way I would take a 1980's Chrysler K car over a 2012 Hyundai. The new Hyundai is superior in almost every aspect. I drove some K-cars in the 80s, and don't miss anything about them.

tibbitts · Post by **tibbitts** » Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:32 am

Dave76 wrote:
tibbitts wrote:
Bongleur wrote:re fleet orders --- yea, I spent a little time trying to figure out how to get a police or taxi package. I'm sure any dealer wants your money, but I'd like to go in knowing how not to get totally ripped off for it. There must be some dealer who caters to people who want those packages and who buys the minimum quantity to re-sell individually to local dealers. Or something.
It would be interesting if you could report on your experiences search for fleet vehicle availability.

However I think you'll find the range of products much less than it was previously. For example in the '70s and '80s, you had manufacturers offering what were then small, medium, and large vehicles, all with readily available (to an appropriate customer) fleet-oriented options. Today you are more likely to find one car and one SUV. And as I said before, most of the heavy-duty options for "retail" cars are gone. However, overall cars are much higher quality, and incorporate components that would have probably qualified as heavy-duty in the old days.

Paul
I'm not impressed with the quality of today's cars. I have two cars -- a 2012 Hyundai and a 1987 Chrysler New Yorker (link below). The Chrysler has a soft-touch dashboard and real carpeting, unlike the Hyundai. Also, the Hyundai doesn't have real cloth seats. This car's upholstery has a strange synthetic mesh material. I really don't know what to call it. Ford uses the same kind of material in the Focus.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIbv7bku15E

Having had experience with both an '80s K-car Chrysler (non-New Yorker, but leather) and 2012 Hyundai, I'm going to agree with you regarding the interior appearance/feel, with the caveat that I only had a brief encounter with a Limited (leather) Hyundai vs. the "cloth" variety, and my experience with the Chrysler was with the leather variety. But I'd make the same statement about my '85 or '87 cloth Dodges, or my '91 cloth Taurus - the overall interior feel was much, much higher-end on the older cars. My not-so-old cloth '05 Impala also has vastly superior interior materials. Hyundai just did a horrible job with the interior, and I think it wasn't even a cost story - possibly just bad taste. The Elantra, at least, has a very, very plastic interior, and the "soft" Hyundai steering wheel is very poorly done, even compared to the hard plastic steering wheel on my '73 Plymouth. At least the Plymouth steering wheel didn't pretend to be something it wasn't.

Having said that, the overall quality is superior on the Hyundai, and you get an extra 6-10mpg or so vs. the 2.2 turbo.

Paul